Fr. Nicholas Gruner

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pat_Penisten
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And the fact that Sr Lucia said the consecration was accepted by heaven means what then?
When did she say it?

Compare the evidence supporting the fact that she said the consecration did not suffice, to the flimsy evidence for the case that she said it did suffice. Why don’t you post both sets of evidence here and let’s examine it.
 
According to Fr. Gruner she did not change her story. Supposedly, after years of saying the contrary she typed a letter that said John Paul II’s consecration sufficed. The problem is, according to Cardinal Bertone himself, she never used a type-writer.

Another point: Mary requested that Russia be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope together with all the Bishops

In 1984, John Paul II consecrated the world (not Russia) to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and did not do so with all the bishops of the world, whereas Pius XII consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary BY NAME… but unfortunately did not do with with the rest of the Bishops.

Why would the non-consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by John Paul II suffice, and the actual consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by Pius XII not suffice?
So? Maybe she’d injured her hand or was getting old and arthritic or what have you, and on this occasion made use of a typewriter, who knows? Is it her signature at the bottom? Could she still read? Then why think it’s not what she wished to say?

As for the Consecration … firstly Russia was almost certainly consecrated by JP2, along with the rest of the world. Unless you believe somehow Russia isn’t part of the world any more or something?

What it sounds like is that JP2 at least made an effort to get the Bishops to join him, even if they didn’t all do so (and you have no idea how difficult it would be to get every last one of them to do so - not like Fatima is binding public revelation, after all). Whereas it sounds like Pius XII didn’t make any effort to get any other Bishops to join him.

Assuming that this was the case (of course I may be wrong), it sounds quite reasonable for Our Lady to place greater emphasis on having the world’s Bishops (or a large number of them) joining together in prayer, rather than the exact wording of specifically having to mention Russia by name when a five-year-old could tell you that ‘consecrating the world’ includes consecrating Russia.
 
If you have read the 10 articles across the top of the page on his website - www.fatima.org - and you still disagree, I won’t argue with you… but I don’t think you have read them.

But if you do muster up the courage to read those articles, you will see that the “official” story being maintained by Cardinal Bertone is falling apart. He and his story have become a laughing stock in Rome. He has been going on TV trying to defend the indefensible and only digging himself into a deeper hole.

The story, as well as the events surrounding it, is explained in those 10 articles at the top of the page:

Here’s a link to the “report from Italy”: fatimapeaceconferences.com/solideo_paolini_2007_en.asp
I am tragically sorry that I will not place credence in anything from that website until the Vatican tells me I can.
I believe it is spiritually harmful as well as sinful to do otherwise.
 
I am tragically sorry that I will not place credence in anything from that website until the Vatican tells me I can.
I believe it is spiritually harmful as well as sinful to do otherwise.
👍 It sure is.
 
Okay, when a judge judges a case, he listens to both sides of the story. Of course both lawyers may be “biased” and will be trying to put forth the best arguments possible. And then a judge makes the judgment based on the evidence.
 
catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0010fea1.asp
An excerpt from This Rock…
Secret No More
by Jimmy Akin


As had Pius XII, John Paul II decided to consecrate not only Russia but also the entire world to her Immaculate Heart. After he read the third part of the secret in July, he decided to journey to Fatima on May 13, 1982, and there performed the Act of Entrustment.

This act, however, did not appear to satisfy the requested consecration, and so, “on 25 March 1984 in Saint Peter’s Square, while recalling the fiat uttered by Mary at the Annunciation, the Holy Father, in spiritual union with the bishops of the world, who had been ‘convoked’ beforehand, entrusted all men and women and all peoples to the Immaculate Heart of Mary” (Bertone, MF).

“Sister Lucia personally confirmed that this solemn and universal act of consecration corresponded to what Our Lady wished (‘Yes it has been done just as Our Lady asked, on 25 March 1984’: Letter of 8 November 1989). Hence any further discussion or request is without basis” (Bertone, MF).
 
According to the info from Jimmy Akin, Cardinal Bertone agrees that this issue is done.
 
Reallyso show me the proof. Make us believers from something other then the Fatima.com site.

There are many well-informed Catholics on this forum and all over the world that place their trust in what Sr Lucia and the Vatican say over that of Fr Gruner. Both cannot be correct…and my money is with the church and the good and holy late Sister.

Not everything is a conspiracy.
The statement in my post was from the Fatima website!
My** question** was** below it** in another color!
I was not seeking nor was I offering proof :rolleyes: !
Loosen up!!
 
According to the info from Jimmy Akin, Cardinal Bertone agrees that this issue is done.
Issues such as this have been dealt with thoroughly at the Fatima.org website. But of course if people are going to simply avoid going to it there is almost no point in having a discussion. Actually any rational discussion becomes almost impossible. And I could also point out the testimony of Italian Catholic journalist Socci, who at first fully believed the whole Third Secret was revealed. But, being a journalist and wanting to investigate the matter first, he did. And came to the opposite conclusion. But because these articles are on Fatima.org’s website people will avoid them without looking at them (although I’m sure articles about Socci and his investigation are not only there).
 
We live in a day when the good are persecuted and the evil are left alone.

The Priests who commit the most outrageous abuses at Mass are left alone; the priest who use invalid matter, and purposefully do not say the words of consecration are left alone by their Bishop. Priest who lead their flock astray through heresy are left alone. Priests who molest boys are protected by their Bishop, and moved from parish to parish.

What was Fr. Gruner’s crime, for which he was suspended? He was not accused of anything mentioned above. He has never been accused of heresy, or liturgical abuses, or child molestation. In fact, he has never been accused of anything at all inapropriate.

His sole crime is that he is not incardinated into a diocese. And why is he not incardinated into a diocese? Because whenever he finds a Bishop to incardinate him, his enemies in Rome - the modernists - send a letter to that Bishop telling him not to incardinate Fr. Gruner. That is his crime for which he was suspended.

The saintly Fr. Gruner is calumniated and slandered by just about everyone (and they will answer for it on judgment day). If you want to know what his real crime is, it is this: He promotes the true message of Fatima and has the courage to say what almost no one else will: that the Pope must consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, as requested by heaven, and that we did not get the entire third secret.

One of the few others who had the courage to say what everyone else knows, but will not say, was Mother Angelica

MOTHER ANGELICA, May 16, 2001: "As for the Secret, well I happen to be one of those individuals who thinks we didn’t get the whole thing. There. I told ya! I mean, you have the right to your own opinion, don’t you, Father? There, you know, that’s my opinion. Because I think it’s scary."

Mother Angelica had the courage to say what any reasonable person who has seen both sides would say. And if there is still anyone who thinks that Russia was consecrated by John Paul II in 1984, or thinks we were given the entire third secret in 2000, all they need to do is read Fr. Gruner’s website… but they won’t. And why is that? Because the enemies of the truth have been very successful in slandering him to the point that no one will consider any of the evidence he provides. They are very smart for doing that, since the evidence will convince anyone who still has the ability to think.

But it is no longer only the saintly Fr. Gruner who is saying it. It has now been admitted by Archbishop Capovilla, the secretary of John XXIII himself, who was present when John XXIII first opened the third secret and who is one of only two living people know to have read it. In fact, the handwritten note on the front of the Third Secret was written by Archbishop Capovilla. He recently admitted to an Italian journalist - who wrote a book on the third secret (and he has the admission on tape) - that there are two parts to the third secret, and that Rome refuses to release the second part.

The evidence is so overwhelming that no one with any sense would be able to read it and conclude any differently. All you have to do is read what John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger said about the third secret before the year 2000 ( when only a portion of it was given). What they described then has absolutely nothing to do with what we were given in 2000.

Most people have been so deceived by the liars that they refuse to look at both sides. That is their choice, but they need to realize that if they take part in slandering this good and innocent Priest, they will answer for it on judgment day… and it won’t be pretty.
So, if we suppose that Fr. Gruner is correct then Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and all the members of the Apostolic Signatura, are all either 1. Mistaken, 2. Evil, or 3. Cowards. I think we can rationally throw out options 2 and 3 so that leaves us with option 1. Mistaken. Now, maybe I’m just stupid and gullible, but it seems to me that rather than Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and all the members of the Apostolic Signatura ALL being mistaken, perhaps it is just as likely that Fr. Gruner and his little website are the one’s who are actually mistaken. So, the prudential decision is with whom should we side? I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe it’s not too smart to side with the priest who violates canon law.

Fr. Gruner should take a page out of St. Pio’s book and act as St. Pio did when he was told not to celebrate the sacraments publically - he obeyed.
 
The statement in my post was from the Fatima website!
My** question** was** below it** in another color!
I was not seeking nor was I offering proof :rolleyes: !
Loosen up!!
Loosen up? :whacky: I think not. There is nothing from this man or his website that should be hailed as the truth. The Vatican has said otherwise.

To loosen up is to set aside the truth. Sorry - not gonna do that.
That’s why I insist to show me the proof.
 
Issues such as this have been dealt with thoroughly at the Fatima.org website. But of course if people are going to simply avoid going to it there is almost no point in having a discussion. Actually any rational discussion becomes almost impossible. And I could also point out the testimony of Italian Catholic journalist Socci, who at first fully believed the whole Third Secret was revealed. But, being a journalist and wanting to investigate the matter first, he did. And came to the opposite conclusion. But because these articles are on Fatima.org’s website people will avoid them without looking at them (although I’m sure articles about Socci and his investigation are not only there).
:banghead: Fatima.org website is put out by Fr Gruner and his followers.
Where is the truth in reading that? Something else please.
 
So, if we suppose that Fr. Gruner is correct then Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and all the members of the Apostolic Signatura, are all either 1. Mistaken, 2. Evil, or 3. Cowards. I think we can rationally throw out options 2 and 3 so that leaves us with option 1. Mistaken. Now, maybe I’m just stupid and gullible, but it seems to me that rather than Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and all the members of the Apostolic Signatura ALL being mistaken, perhaps it is just as likely that Fr. Gruner and his little website are the one’s who are actually mistaken. So, the prudential decision is with whom should we side? I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe it’s not too smart to side with the priest who violates canon law.

Fr. Gruner should take a page out of St. Pio’s book and act as St. Pio did when he was told not to celebrate the sacraments publically - he obeyed.
Thanks…of voice a reason! AMEN.
 
Fr. Gruner has disputed what some in the heirarchy say’s already happened. For this he loses his incardination? I believe he is being stabbed in the back by those committed to a cover up. It’s time to clean house. Holy Spirit guide us.
 
Issues such as this have been dealt with thoroughly at the Fatima.org website. But of course if people are going to simply avoid going to it there is almost no point in having a discussion. Actually any rational discussion becomes almost impossible. And I could also point out the testimony of Italian Catholic journalist Socci, who at first fully believed the whole Third Secret was revealed. But, being a journalist and wanting to investigate the matter first, he did. And came to the opposite conclusion. But because these articles are on Fatima.org’s website people will avoid them without looking at them (although I’m sure articles about Socci and his investigation are not only there).
Why would the Vatican do this…**what reason would it have for deceiving the Church?:hmmm: **
 
:banghead: Fatima.org website is put out by Fr Gruner and his followers.
Where is the truth in reading that? Something else please.
How can you possibly know whether or not Fr. Gruner’s website is full of lies if you have not even visited it? (my impression is that you have not).

And even if I find another website (which I’m sure exists) that claims Russia has not been consecrated and the full Third Secret has not been revealed why would you want to go there either?
 
Why would Bishops all over the world hide pedophile priests for multiple offenses for years? :confused: Why were we lied to that VII called for the desecration of our Churches, the protestanation or our liturgy>:confused: It’s called cover your butt, and they’re not good at it. 👍
 
Loosen up? :whacky: I think not. There is nothing from this man or his website that should be hailed as the truth. The Vatican has said otherwise.

To loosen up is to set aside the truth. Sorry - not gonna do that.
That’s why I insist to show me the proof.
 
How can you possibly know whether or not Fr. Gruner’s website is full of lies if you have not even visited it? (my impression is that you have not).

And even if I find another website (which I’m sure exists) that claims Russia has not been consecrated and the full Third Secret has not been revealed why would you want to go there either?
Let me see…does the Vatican support his views? Nope. Then why would I? I do not need to investigate - I need to be obedient. I have opted to believe the Vatican and not a conspiracy theory.

We do need to stand up for what is good and right when lies are spread.
 
Come on folks! Everyone knows Fr. Gruner is a saint and Pope JP II, Pope B XVI & Sr.Lucia are liers! If you don’t believe me, just ask most of the radtrads on this forum! After all they say JP II is a anti-pope and a heretic! What more prove do you need?!?!

Pax… your so full of it, I advise you not to stray to far from the bathroom!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top